Friends and neighbours
Madhesi
dissatisfaction with India has been growing since the November 19 election
Dipendra Jha
DEC 25 -
By the simple fact that they live along the border, Madhesis have more
interactions with Indians. Madhesis share linguistic, cultural and
religious affinities with Indians who live on the other side of the
border. There is enormous goodwill for people on both sides of the
border, thanks to the long legacy of multifaceted relations between
the peoples of the two countries. Peoples on both sides of the border
want their counterparts to live a dignified life where equity is
ensured.
However, it is because of this cultural affinity that the hill ruling
elite never considered Madhesis as true Nepalis. In fact, when
Madhesis demand their rights, some ultra-nationalists in Kathmandu
think that they are doing so at the behest of India. Kathmandu and
Delhi often forget that Madhesis have their own identity and
aspirations that are separate from their multi-faceted relations with
Indians along the border region.
Changing attitudes
Since the 2007 Madhes Movement, attitudes have begun to change in the
Madhes and dissatisfaction with India is growing. There are some
Madhesi politicians and intellectuals who believe that India is using
its leverage with Madhesis to make compromises with Nepal’s ruling
elites, who do not want to restructure the state in a fundamentally
different manner from the past. Although India might not have done
anything to directly harm the Madhesi cause in Nepal, there are some
who believe that India played a role in splitting Madhesis to serve
its national interests.
What is more worrying is that dissatisfaction against India grew
sharply in Madhes after the November 19 Constituent Assembly (CA)
election. There is a perception in the Madhes that India did not
maintain a neutral role in the election and rather, supported its
traditional allies—the Nepali Congress (NC) and the CPN-UML. If this
is true, Madhesis have never been hostile to India and there is really
no reason for India to do things at the detriment of the Madhesi
cause. Some Madhesis who are unhappy with India argue that India did
not support Madhesis in the past nor will it do so in the future. When
it comes to bilateral relations, such perceptions need to be seriously
dealt with.
The growing sense of discomfort over India’s suspected role during the
election should serve as a reminder to India
that it cannot take for granted that Madhesis will never be
anti-India. Madhesis might not gain anything by whipping up
anti-Indian sentiments but if they too start bashing India—as some
ultra left parties tend to do—things could get that much more
difficult for India.
One more obstacle
First generation Madhesi leaders are unhappy with India but are
reluctant to speak their mind for a variety of reasons. Second
generation leaders, however, are unhappy with India for its support of
the NC and the UML at the cost of Madhesi constituencies and vocal
about it. In fact, these leaders now increasingly believe that India’s
role in Nepal’s contemporary politics could be an obstacle in their
fight for equal rights. A youth leader from the Madhesi Janadhikar
Forum-Nepal told this scribe that India will not extend moral support
to the Madhesi cause as it wants to keep Nepali ruling elites happy so
as to better serve its national interest. Similarly, Madhesi
Janadhikar Forum-Loktantrik candidate Ajay Gupta, who lost the
first-past-the-post election to UML leader Madhav Kumar Nepal from
Rautahat-1, said, “Whenever Madhesis assert issues vital to their
empowerment, most importantly, federalism, India sends emissaries from
Delhi to force the Madhesis to enter into a compromise with the ruling
elites.”
New Delhi’s policy has always been to collaborate with Nepal’s power
centres so that it can consolidate its national interests. Whether one
believes it or not, Delhi wields enormous clout in Nepal and can
easily support the just cause of inclusion. As far as the causes of
marginalised communities are concerned, it seems to be unwilling to
extend its support because it believes that doing so would infuriate
the ruling class, causing it to lose its clout. As the largest
democracy of the world, India should have no problems supporting the
cause of inclusive democracy but so far, India has not aided any
Nepali movement launched for the socio-economic empowerment of
marginalised communities. Furthermore, there has not been a single
example, during neither the Panchayat period nor post-1990, where
India openly supported a Madhesi cause.
Officials in-charge of India’s foreign policy vis-à-vis Nepal seem to
fear a Madhesi win for identity politics could have a ripple effect in
the neighbouring states of Bihar, Uttar Pradesh (UP) and West Bengal.
This seems to be the primary reason for those officials wanting to
dilute identity-based movements in Nepal.
Border bonhomie
People from UP and Bihar certainly sympathise with Nepali Madhesis.
This alone, however, will not change India’s foreign policy vis-à-vis
Nepal nor can the bonhomie across the border make Madhesis less
nationalistic. The fact is that Madhesis are now very clear about
Indian foreign policy objectives in Nepal and know they will have to
fight for their rights on their own. Sadhbhawana Party leader Sanjay
Kumar Sah, along with a number of other Madhesi leaders, want to
cultivate better relations with politicians, journalists and civil
society in Bihar, UP and West Bengal. Sah made such a proposal at the
party’s recent Central Committee meet. This is a reflection of their
frustration with the mandarins in New Delhi.
As far as federalism is concerned, India may have some legitimate
concerns. The Indian establishment, however, should not be wary of the
prospect of fewer provinces in the Madhes. Fewer provinces will help
India maintain and expand its cross-border security, along with aiding
its development and economic agendas. Can one imagine the situation of
UP and Bihar if it had remained under a unitary state structure?
Anti-Indian sentiment already runs high in the hills of Nepal. If the
Madhes goes the same way, New Delhi will have an uphill task dealing
with the Nepali population.
Jha is an advocate at the Supreme Court
http://www.ekantipur.com/2013/12/25/opinion/friends-and-neighbours/382879.html#.Urpx5c_j4hU.facebook
DEC 25 -
By the simple fact that they live along the border, Madhesis have more
interactions with Indians. Madhesis share linguistic, cultural and
religious affinities with Indians who live on the other side of the
border. There is enormous goodwill for people on both sides of the
border, thanks to the long legacy of multifaceted relations between
the peoples of the two countries. Peoples on both sides of the border
want their counterparts to live a dignified life where equity is
ensured.
However, it is because of this cultural affinity that the hill ruling
elite never considered Madhesis as true Nepalis. In fact, when
Madhesis demand their rights, some ultra-nationalists in Kathmandu
think that they are doing so at the behest of India. Kathmandu and
Delhi often forget that Madhesis have their own identity and
aspirations that are separate from their multi-faceted relations with
Indians along the border region.
Changing attitudes
Since the 2007 Madhes Movement, attitudes have begun to change in the
Madhes and dissatisfaction with India is growing. There are some
Madhesi politicians and intellectuals who believe that India is using
its leverage with Madhesis to make compromises with Nepal’s ruling
elites, who do not want to restructure the state in a fundamentally
different manner from the past. Although India might not have done
anything to directly harm the Madhesi cause in Nepal, there are some
who believe that India played a role in splitting Madhesis to serve
its national interests.
What is more worrying is that dissatisfaction against India grew
sharply in Madhes after the November 19 Constituent Assembly (CA)
election. There is a perception in the Madhes that India did not
maintain a neutral role in the election and rather, supported its
traditional allies—the Nepali Congress (NC) and the CPN-UML. If this
is true, Madhesis have never been hostile to India and there is really
no reason for India to do things at the detriment of the Madhesi
cause. Some Madhesis who are unhappy with India argue that India did
not support Madhesis in the past nor will it do so in the future. When
it comes to bilateral relations, such perceptions need to be seriously
dealt with.
The growing sense of discomfort over India’s suspected role during the
election should serve as a reminder to India
that it cannot take for granted that Madhesis will never be
anti-India. Madhesis might not gain anything by whipping up
anti-Indian sentiments but if they too start bashing India—as some
ultra left parties tend to do—things could get that much more
difficult for India.
One more obstacle
First generation Madhesi leaders are unhappy with India but are
reluctant to speak their mind for a variety of reasons. Second
generation leaders, however, are unhappy with India for its support of
the NC and the UML at the cost of Madhesi constituencies and vocal
about it. In fact, these leaders now increasingly believe that India’s
role in Nepal’s contemporary politics could be an obstacle in their
fight for equal rights. A youth leader from the Madhesi Janadhikar
Forum-Nepal told this scribe that India will not extend moral support
to the Madhesi cause as it wants to keep Nepali ruling elites happy so
as to better serve its national interest. Similarly, Madhesi
Janadhikar Forum-Loktantrik candidate Ajay Gupta, who lost the
first-past-the-post election to UML leader Madhav Kumar Nepal from
Rautahat-1, said, “Whenever Madhesis assert issues vital to their
empowerment, most importantly, federalism, India sends emissaries from
Delhi to force the Madhesis to enter into a compromise with the ruling
elites.”
New Delhi’s policy has always been to collaborate with Nepal’s power
centres so that it can consolidate its national interests. Whether one
believes it or not, Delhi wields enormous clout in Nepal and can
easily support the just cause of inclusion. As far as the causes of
marginalised communities are concerned, it seems to be unwilling to
extend its support because it believes that doing so would infuriate
the ruling class, causing it to lose its clout. As the largest
democracy of the world, India should have no problems supporting the
cause of inclusive democracy but so far, India has not aided any
Nepali movement launched for the socio-economic empowerment of
marginalised communities. Furthermore, there has not been a single
example, during neither the Panchayat period nor post-1990, where
India openly supported a Madhesi cause.
Officials in-charge of India’s foreign policy vis-à-vis Nepal seem to
fear a Madhesi win for identity politics could have a ripple effect in
the neighbouring states of Bihar, Uttar Pradesh (UP) and West Bengal.
This seems to be the primary reason for those officials wanting to
dilute identity-based movements in Nepal.
Border bonhomie
People from UP and Bihar certainly sympathise with Nepali Madhesis.
This alone, however, will not change India’s foreign policy vis-à-vis
Nepal nor can the bonhomie across the border make Madhesis less
nationalistic. The fact is that Madhesis are now very clear about
Indian foreign policy objectives in Nepal and know they will have to
fight for their rights on their own. Sadhbhawana Party leader Sanjay
Kumar Sah, along with a number of other Madhesi leaders, want to
cultivate better relations with politicians, journalists and civil
society in Bihar, UP and West Bengal. Sah made such a proposal at the
party’s recent Central Committee meet. This is a reflection of their
frustration with the mandarins in New Delhi.
As far as federalism is concerned, India may have some legitimate
concerns. The Indian establishment, however, should not be wary of the
prospect of fewer provinces in the Madhes. Fewer provinces will help
India maintain and expand its cross-border security, along with aiding
its development and economic agendas. Can one imagine the situation of
UP and Bihar if it had remained under a unitary state structure?
Anti-Indian sentiment already runs high in the hills of Nepal. If the
Madhes goes the same way, New Delhi will have an uphill task dealing
with the Nepali population.
Jha is an advocate at the Supreme Court
http://www.ekantipur.com/2013/12/25/opinion/friends-and-neighbours/382879.html#.Urpx5c_j4hU.facebook
No comments:
Post a Comment